INDUCTIVE ARG.

STANDARDS: strong weak (degrees) - defeasible -(nonmonotonic)
GENERALIZATION FROM SAMPLES
1. QUESTIONS: * premise false or unjustified? *sample too small? (depends on data or background & whats at stake) *sample biased? *question slanted?
2. APPLICATION OF GENERALIZATION(or statistical syllogism)
  1. conflicting reference classes: the smallest is the most important
INFERENCE TO THE BEST EXPLANATION
1. from the observation to the explanation
2. NEEDS: 1.explaining 2.deepness(needs no other explaining, doesnot led to another question) 3. powerfull(aplies to many cases-"I did not run well this time" ) 4. falsifiable o refutable("unlucky"-verosimil,que pueda ser falsa; the explanation is compatible with any event, including the phenomenon not occurring) 5.modest(no conspiracy, not too much; no fish in the whole river) &simplicity(no ghosts, no new laws or subatomic particles) 6.conservative (respects well established beliefs)
  1. EXPLANATORY VIRTUES
ANALOGY
1. comparison between two things

Zusammenfassung der Ressource

	Erstellt von cristian velez vor fast 12 Jahre